Monday, October 8, 2012

Yikes, A Peak Inside the House of a Neoconservative

Alan Dershowitz is putting his West Cambridge, MA house up for sale. Here are a few pics, which judging from them, if I lived in that house, I would want to attack Iran and most of the rest of the world, also.

Two questions: 1). What makes Dershowitz a neocon? He doesn't seem to subscribe to a single tenant of neoconservatism other than his strident support for the state of Israel. While I think Israel should be open to criticism as much as any other state, it doesn't seem to follow that those who don't share that view are necessarily neocons. This conflation of ardent supporters of Israel with neoconservatives is not merely intellectually lazy, it allows true neocons to deflect criticism of their warmongering with accusations of anti-semitism. 2). What does Dershowitz's poor taste in home decor have to do with anything related to his beliefs or position on any number of legal, social, economic, or foreign policies?

You answered your first question with this: "...other than his strident support for the state of Israel." This is the primary belief of the neocons in my opinion. They always put Israel first in all matters as that is where their true loyalties lie, not to America. To this can be added their lack of interest in upholding the Constitution in a number of areas starting with the misnamed "patriot act", the military commissions act and most recently the NDAA. They have either praised these or ignored them. They don't care about immigration, legal or illegal. The list goes on. In short, outside of Israel they can be called social democrats and that is being mild.

As for number two, I don't know the author's view, but my own suspicion is people who like so-called "modern art" over that of the style of the Masters tend to be nihilists. I believe this because of their numerous attempts to gin up more wars in the Middle East not only out of the desire to put Israel first, but a blood lust as well. They enjoy killing, stealing and torturing. If I wanted to torture someone I wouldn't waterboard him (a neocon favorite, btw), I would lock him up in either one of those rooms and make him listen to Michael Medved on the radio and watch Sean Hannity on tv.

Ryan explained it all, little to add. The neocons were leftists, starting out as Trotskyists, who came over to the GOP from the Dems because the Dems were not aggressive enough in attacking Israel's enemies and supporting Israel's settlements in the last 22 percent of Palestinian land. The neocons are all for mass immigration, Affirmative Discrimination, a big welfare state, and anything else that is leftist. Note how they opposed reducing these things when the GOP was in control of the White House and both chambers of congress a decade ago.

Leftists love degenerate "modern" art; those who peddle that art have always been leftists. They have explicitly promoted that "art" as an attack on traditional society. Anyone filling his home with it is NOT a conservative.

Now, as for Anonymous' comment: "Also: name an instance where a true neocon deflected criticism of his or her warmongering with charges of anti-Semitism." --Are you kidding me? They do that all the time. For example this little quip: "Neocon, a word where neo stands for new and con stands for Jewish." Saw it in National Review. Which, as William Buckley conceded, has been taken over by neocons. (Buckley said he regretted allowing them to do so. But by then he had retired and played out his role. The neocons treated him with great disdain.)

You're right. There are numerous examples in this old Sam Francis column where the neocons and their strap hangers use "antisemitism" as an excuse to change the subject from the antics of the neocons to the person the subject instead.

http://www.vdare.com/articles/rush-limbaugh-joins-the-frumpurge

I can add this theory of mine to the business about modern "art". I suspect that the sellers this garbage was able to make inroads against real art by playing on the vanity and snobbishness of the people who make up the arts crowd. They were able to get a few folks to go along with them and the rest followed suit as they wouldn't want to thought of as philistines. It can be thought of as the modern day version of the Emperor's New Clothes.

In other words, because I said so. But a neocon like Dick Cheney puts his own idea about America above any loyalty to Israel. We can disagree with him all we want, but he's no "Israel firster."

And Dershowitz? He may be a Likudnik or an ultra-Zionist or a Jewish chauvinist or nationalist, but he didn't see himself as a neocon and the neocons didn't see him as one of their own. You really have to distort things in an arbitrary way to define him that way.

His taste or lack of taste? Not so unusual for "progressive" academics in the Fifties and Sixties, when he probably bought the house. Calling it "degenerate art" as one poster does brings in some really offensive historical echoes.

****Now, as for Anonymous' comment: "Also: name an instance where a true neocon deflected criticism of his or her warmongering with charges of anti-Semitism." --Are you kidding me? They do that all the time. For example this little quip: "Neocon, a word where neo stands for new and con stands for Jewish." Saw it in National Review.****

Carpenter, while that definitely is an accusation of anti-Semitism, it isn't in reply to charges of warmongering. Those accusations usually are in response to divided loyalty or Israel Firstism.

I completely agree with you and Ryan on the neocons. However, the other Anonymous makes a good point about overgeneralization. Nothing wrong with precision and getting the details right as Ryan mostly does. That makes us more effective in defeating the enemy.

Believe it or not, it's not as bad when you're actually there. Although maybe you're just distracted from the decoration by all of the neat things he has inside (such as the autograph of each of the 44 presidents).

Despite its hideous appearance, there are any houses whose decor is far worse. Mine, for example, looks like the results of a major industrial accident at a Salvation Army store. I'd post photos, but y'all have been sickened enough. But one major benefit of the Dershowitz house is that if the cat throws up on the rug, no one will notice.

As an aside, during the Cold War years the CIA was secretly spending millions funding foundations which supported modern art. Modern Art was employed by the CIA as a psychological weapon against the Soviets. In the mind of the CIA elite, Modern Art's nihilism represented American spontaneous (unthinking?) individualism as opposed to the regimented mass man depicted in Socialist Realism. So, it looks like, as in all kinds of central planning, the market for much of Modern Art had a single major patron - the CIA!

Poor Al. He's either a useful idiot or a Manchurian Candidate.

It seems that much of pop culture is a tool of government mind control propaganda. It's surprising how many rock stars came from families with military or intelligence backgrounds. Maybe the Soviets were on to something when they banned Western rock music!

I'm an architect. None of this is surprising. The rich have just as bad tastes as the middle class and poor. They simply can afford to buy more expensive crap. Dersh is violating a major rule of staging a home for sale. It should be minimally furnished to appear bigger, and all colors should be neutral. Maybe there's a place for the psychedelic in mind control, but home buyer's nervous systems are agitated by it.